Inverse Marx generator

Shhh... c'mon, John... I'm the only one that cusses 'round here. They all filter me for it.

JF has done this several times now, created a bogus Spice sim to prove something entirely wrong. He has a real talent for it.

In the case at hand? Of course not. You don't seem to understand it either.

Every undergrad EE student learns how to write the differential equations, and come up with solutions, for basic R-L-C circuits. And they start with ideal components, parts whose bahavior is expressed with the basic equations: linearity, integration, differentiation.

This is not "my" manner, it's the way EEs are taught. Or at least it was; I suspect you can nowadays get some sort of "EE" degree without actually understanding much about electricity. I hear that field theory is now an elective at many EE schools.

What path? Understanding bog simple circuits? Stuff like this should be second nature to any electronics designer. It sure shouldn't need to involve cranking up Spice. You use Spice when you *don't* understand how a circuit works.

John

What happens? Does it oscillate for millions of cycles?

In fact, it oscillates for millions of cycles even when the Q is 200. Eventually Spice will run out of floating-point precision, but that's just Spice.

John

How in the world could you post anything that wrong? If you actually ran it, and accepted the results, well, there's nothing polite I can say.

So let me say this as quietly as I can:

YOU DON'T NEED SPICE TO UNDERSTAND CIRCUITS THIS SIMPLE.

John

Remember what Miss Denton said: Check Your Work!

John

[snip]

Funny how Spice is great for verifying your idealistic circuits.

And not so great when it debunks your crap.

I don't "design" using Spice, and you know it. I use Spice to verify that my concept will work under all possible conditions of manufacturing variability, temperature and rancid power supplies.

Being chips, my stuff needs to work right out of the foundry... tweaks are next to impossible (or very expensive)... I bet your first passes are full of "blue-wire" :-)

You, you throw out a suicide-biased NPN, and call it a current source, when it was nothing close, other than maybe you could describe it as a pull-down.

How come you remained silent when I took your very values and ran it over temperature and compliance?

Because you're a hoax... and NARCISSISTIC to boot :-)

I think it's time for everyone to assign you to the same dung pile as Slowman. ...Jim Thompson

--
| James E.Thompson, CTO                            |    mens     |
| Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems  |    manus    |
| Phoenix, Arizona  85048    Skype: Contacts Only  |             |
| Voice:(480)460-2350  Fax: Available upon request |  Brass Rat  |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com |    1962     |
             
Obama isn't going to raise your taxes...it's Bush' fault:  Not re-
newing the Bush tax cuts will increase the bottom tier rate by 50%

--
Don't ask me, I might confuse you with a reply you don't want to
understand.

Instead, just run the sim and find out for yourself.

Damn. I move over to a provider where I can't be mean anymore and the lack of it has to get filled in somewhere.

Oh well.. at least it is probably deserved.

[snip]

You seem to ;-)

You need to learn to set up LTspice without all its simulation speed-ups in place... then you can see reality instead of ideality. ...Jim Thompson

-- | James E.Thompson, CTO | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at

| 1962 | Obama isn't going to raise your taxes...it's Bush' fault: Not re- newing the Bush tax cuts will increase the bottom tier rate by 50%

I thought you said that you removed the R.

I have yet to open any such app as it relates to this thread at all.

You have me confused.

Path? The Conduction path, ya dope.

--
Why bother when there's always you there, nipping at my heels?

--
Millions of cycles indeed...

You must have forgotten that part of the EE ed you referred to. The part related to when a term is considered zero.

I see now where John's statement about your problem near zero and infinity comes from.

You eluded all through the thread that said oscillations would occur with no drop in voltage.

Now, you want to look at the very tiniest of reverb remaining long after any real examination would consider the 'signal' to be zero.

Can one cap infinitely transfer charge to another without loss?

He posted the wrong file, dindgledorf. A mere button press error.

Grow up.

It was a button press error on a file, dingledorf.

Check your brain. You first.

None of you are making any sense. This is a simple circuit, it behaves the way it behaves, and you guys are all panty-bunched over it.

John

There is no point in simulating this. There's a closed-form solution that's well known. It's in most any introductory EE text.

Explain "run into noise" please. There are electrical resonators with Qs over 1e8, and they'll be down roughly a percent after a million cycles. There are physical phenomena, like NMR resonances, with real-world Qs over 1e9. They ring visibly on a scope for seconds at

500 MHz.

If you are trying to say that lossy circuits have loss, I won't argue the point.

John

Hey, look as silly as you like.

John